I am
contacting you today because I am concerned about a significant
number of primates who have escaped from their enclosures, were
injured or died at the University of Washington, Seattle (UW).

Again,
according to UW primate health care records, many animals were
negligently injured. On 2/27/11 Primate J97270 was injured because
“AT reported injury to animal. Animal grabbed scissors from
AT.” On approximately 4/5/11 Primate K11027, an infant who was
having issues with thermo-regulation (an external heat source was
used) is listed with a “what looks to be burn trauma of the D5 of
the left foot.” On 1/20/11 surgery for primate A07005
was cancelled: “Turned off gas and notified veterinarian.
Veterinarian cancelled surgery as the animal appears to have had
access to food. . . . Animal vomited large quantity of
partially digested food and extubated itself. Food observed in
trach tube.” On 4/14/10 a surgical procedure was botched when “1mm
probe inadvertently penetrated brain tissue during procedure.”
This monkey lived with neurological deficits for a substantial
period of time with a “right sided head tilt and turns only to the
right.” Primate R08004 was simply found dead with “severe
edema and swelling of head and both arms with jacket and collar in
place. Ingesta present in mouth and a few drops of blood noted
on nose and stabilization lugs.” Primate A07121 was euthanized
because “During a routine blood draw, it was discovered that the
animal had a fractured right femur.”

Clearly the
treatment, or lack thereof, given to these monkeys violates Section
2.33 Veterinary care requirements for observation, because this
broken bone should have been diagnosed previously, not “discovered”
during a blood draw, and the infant primate if observed properly
would not have been burned. These incidents must
also raise questions regarding the staff of the UW, and their
ability to do their jobs correctly because a primate who is going
into surgery must not be fed, probes should not be shoved into the
brain causing neurological deficits, and it is usually best if
primates not be allowed to play with scissors. These
situations potentially violate multiple sections of the Animal
Welfare Act including, but not limited to, 2.32 Personnel
Qualifications, and/or section 2.131 Animal Handling, and again,
2.33 Adequate Veterinary care.

The causes of
injuries for other animals were not as clear but the consequences
for these animals were severe. For Example, eight inches of
the tail of Primate M07200 were amputated due to a traumatic injury
on 4/15/10. On 9/3/10 eight inches of the tail of Primate
M05221 were amputated following a traumatic injury. On 4/3/11
the tips of several fingers on the left hand of Primate A06077 were
avulsed (forcibly detached) exposing bone. Primate K03150 is
listed with two lacerations, a 5 cm injury and an older 10 cm
injury. These are by no means the only animals with
traumatic injuries. If all of the traumatic injuries for this
facility were listed, this complaint would be pages longer. These
incidents may well also violate section 2.32 Personnel
Qualifications, and/or section 2.131 Animal Handling, and again,
2.33 Adequate Veterinary care.

As you know, the UW recently paid a fine for the deaths of several
animals. One of whom had essentially starved to death, losing
a substantial amount of body weight.

As you also
know from the previous case regarding the University of Washington,
Seattle, this facility has a policy that states: “WANPRC IACUC
Approved Animal Use Policy regarding "Permissible Weight Loss"
clearly states that, "The upper limit of acceptable weight loss in
animals on experimental regimens shall be 20%." In violation
of the UW’s own policy, primate J04245 (4/6/10) developed a weight
loss which the record states was “over 25%.” This
primate’s record not only constitutes a clear violation of the UW’s
own policy, but also of section 2.33 adequate veterinary care.
Similarly, Primate A06014 also had a major loss of weight (7/27/10).
The record for this primate states: “The animal has had a
dermatological condition intermittently since ’07. Recently,
there has been a >20% body weight loss, and the dermatologic
condition has been recurring.” Similarly, primate A02006 also
had (8/18/10) major weight loss. “The animal eventually
developed >25% body weight loss . . .” Again, Primate 01134 is
listed (3/25/11) as having “approximately 30% weight loss.”
Primate 04044 is listed (4/15/11) with a “profound weight loss.”
Primate A08015 is listed on 7/6/10 with a 27% weight loss.
Clearly, all of these animals potentially violate the UW’s own
policy on allowable weight loss, and the section 2.33 requirements
for adequate veterinary care and must begin to call into question
the quality of the staff at the UW, potentially violating 2.32
Personnel Qualifications.

We are
concerned that this facility has violated the Animal Welfare Act in
other ways. We believe that overall, the incidents recounted
herein may indicate potential violations of several sections of the
Animal Welfare Act including but not limited to,: Section 2.33
Veterinary Care. (b)(2) The use of appropriate methods to
prevent, control, diagnose, and treat diseases and injuries; and
(b)(3) daily observation of animals. Section 2.38 Miscellaneous
(f)(1) handling; Section 2.131 Animal Handling; 2.32 Personnel
Qualifications, etc.

As this
investigation is likely to bring to light more violations by the
University of Washington, Seattle, I must also insist that this
facility receives the maximum in penalties for these infractions,
especially since these incidents are directly relevant to the
suffering and deaths of many animals.

I expect that
your office will reply to this correspondence within five business
days.

Rats, mice, birds, amphibians and other animals have been excluded from
coverage by the Animal Welfare Act. Therefore research facility reports
do not include these animals. As a result of this situation, a blank
report, or one with few animals listed, does not mean that a facility
has not performed experiments on non-reportable animals. A blank form
does mean that the facility in question has not used covered animals
(primates, dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, pigs, sheep,
goats, etc.). Rats and mice alone are believed to comprise over 90% of
the animals used in experimentation. Therefore the majority of animals
used at research facilities are not even counted.